Errors and omissions

However hard one tries, and however many people proofread the text, errors slip through. The following are the ones that got through the sifting system into print. They will, of course, be corrected next time around and are posted here so they can get an airing sooner and so that readers will know that I know about them.

If you know of anything else then I would welcome being told so I can look into it and try and get it right next time round.
You may do this by emailing HERE:

Thank you to those who have already supplied corrections.


METROPOLITAN LINE

Page 62 (second para) - the revised direction of running was instituted on 7th November, the work on 3rd October was postponed (this seems to have happened in consequence of diversion of effort following Munich crisis).
Page 85 (top photo caption) - This is self-evidently Dreadnought loco-hauled stock and not 'T' stock
Page 94 (top para) - the reference to 'road to rail' conversion (now there's an idea) should be 'rail to road'.

JUBILEE LINE

Page 5 - The opening date for the Metropolitan Railway should be (10th) January 1863, not December. It is quite extraordinary that so many people missed this, and that I committed the sin in the first place.
Page 22 (last para) - the revised direction of running was instituted on 7th November, the work on 3rd October was postponed.
Page 29 (fourth line up) - "The huge cost of £110-£180 meant..." should, of course, read: "The huge cost of £110-£180 million meant...".
Page 32 - note the omission of a full stop at end of final word.
Page 78 (line 9) - a spare word "but" has mysteriously appeared in the sentence and should be ignored.

DISTRICT LINE

Page 50 (top) - The platform extension was at the east end of platform 4 and it is now known that it survived the replacement of the bridge in 1959 and disappeared between 1980 and 1990. While the fog explanation for the extension in the inspecting officer's report is not to be doubted, it does seem more probable that it was never intended to divert LTSR steam trains but was perhaps to allow District trains to couple up, reducing the paths required during fog, however no instructions have been found to that effect. That the District began running a few long trains as soon as the platform extensions were ready may be material.
Page 81 (third paragraph, second line) - "Upton Park" should read "Upney"

VICTORIA LINE, BAKERLOO LINE, NORTHERN LINE

None noticed yet

 

PICCADILLY LINE,

On page 17 references are made to the various contractors which constructed the line. The names are correct but it emerges that two of the sections are transposed. Thus the Finsbury Park to Strand section was awarded to Walter, Scott & Middleton and the South Kensington to Barons Court tunnel mouth section was awarded to Walker, Price & Reeves. The supervising engineers and contractors for the other two sections are correct. The information originally came from a report in Railway Gazette, December 1906, which was incorrect.

Page 56 (upper caption) - Each reference to "four-car" train ought to be to a "three-car" train; control trailers never appeared at the head of four car trains. (I hadn't seen this addition).

Also, on page 98, the caption was intended to be read in conjunction with a photo of a 1931 stock car while a 1934 stock car picture has in fact been used. Practically the stock was near identical, but the reference to air-worked end doors should be construed as arriving in 1931, not 1934.

On page 130 there is a reference to the opening of the first floor bus station. The correct date of opening was 23 October 1993 (not 1994 as implied). It closed two weeks later owing to the surface being too slippery, and reopened 15 December 1993.

 

HAMMERSMITH & CITY RAILWAY

Page 25 (right hand column, fifth line) - Reference to thirty years should, of course, be to twenty years.

Page 38 (line 15) - The reference to Rowland Hill relates to General Sir Rowland Hill GCB, GCH (later 1st Viscount Hill) and not to the person of similar name who was connected with the General Post Office.

Page 38 (same paragraph as above) - In 1878, Royal Oak station actually stayed put, but the GWR main line tracks were re-routed onto a new alignment south of the platforms (thus placing the platforms on the north side of the railway).

Page 110 (Photo caption) - The car shown at head of train is one of the Metropolitan cars on permanent loan to the H&CR and which were very similar to the H&C stock; these had centre doors fitted at the same time.